hereditary greatness in canada

Hereditary Greatness in CanadaAuthor(s): Margaret A. ThomasSource: Social Forces, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Dec., 1925), pp. 305-310Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3004580 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 17:35

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:35:51 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3004580?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


TEACHING AND RESEARCH 305

HEREDITARY GREATNESS IN CANADA MARGARET A. THOMAS

N THIS short study an attempt has been made to ascertain how frequently traits, whose outward ex-

pression the world calls great, have been transmitted from father to son in the Canadian population. As a secondary theme, studies of nationality and racial origin of the population of Canada have been made to see what groups or types contributed most frequently to the superior men of Canada. The investigation of these two problems raised other closely connected questions.

The problem of hereditary genius in Canada is different from the problem in older and more thickly settled countries. Canada is a larger country than the United States, but its population does not exceed nine million. This population is spread along the southern border line. The number of cities is small, and the population of the largest city is only slightly over 6oo,000. In this new country, with limited centers of culture, it is not amazing to find that the number of men distinguished by superior contribu- tions to the arts and sciences is small.

Sir Francis Galton used the judges of England for his study of hereditary genius. J. McKeen Cattell obtained his list of American men of Science in a unique way. He drew up lists of the leading American scientists in each de- partment. These lists he sent to the men who stood highest in each scientific pursuit, and asked each man to rate his fellows in order of merit. He tnade an average rating from the individually rated lists, and used the top men of each averaged list for his study. Obviously none of these methods was open to me. My list was obtained from the Canadian Who's Who 1923-24. I chose only those

who were born in Canada, and living when the I9z3-z4 edition was published. From the Who's Who I selected 43I men and women who had the longest authentic biographies, and who had distinguished themselves frequently in whatever pro- fession he or she followed, thus excluding those notable merely from a single act. To this list I added iS names of artists who were not included in Who's Who but were known throughout Canada. This gave a grand total of 443 names.

TABLE I

CATEGORY z Z 33

z z 0 q

Agriculturists ........ 3 I I 33.3 Archaeologists........ 3 2. I 33.3 Architects ................. 6 5 3 50 Artists .................... 2 4 I3 12. 50 Authors and poets...... .... 58 i6 4I 70.6 Divines........2.0.o i2. o 50o

Engineers ................. 4I i6 i6 39

Lawyers and judges ........ 7I 49 30 42.2.

Medicine practitioners ...... 36 i8 2 3 63.9 Merchants, etc ............. 68 o Io I4.7

Military leaders..... 2.8 0 9 35 Philosophers ...... . ........ 3 I 3 I00

Musicians . ................ I 0 I I00

Philologists........ I 0 I 100

Political and social econ- omists .................. 5 I 5 I00

Scientists .................. .7 II 2.0 74 Sculptors .................. 2. I I 50

Statesmen, etc ............. 44 9 I5 34 Travelers .................. X 0 I 50

443 I55 2.05

Table I gives the categories into which the 443 distinguished persons were placed; the number in each category; the number of original questionnaires sent out, and



306 SOCIAL FORCES

the nlumber of duplicates which had to be sent out because the first answers were not satisfactory; the total number and the per cent received from each class. Twenty-four of the answers received could niot be used because they were imperfect; this left iSi answers, or 40.8 per cent, on which I have based this study. This appears a very small number from which to draw any conclusion, but it was the largest I was able to obtain using ques- tionnaire mnethods, and it gives some important infornmation.

TABLE II z

In 0 N

0 P4 N

PROVllgCE m 0

z >~ ~

N ~~~~q 0

British Columbia... 49,459 I.4 2. 40.0 Manitoba ............ 6? 2.6o 1.44 3 48. I New Brunswick . ...... 32I, 233 7.43 22 68.8 Nova Scotia .......... 440,572. IO.I9 36 8I .7

Ontario .............. I 92.6, 92.2. 44.56 2.o II4. I

Prince Edward Island.. Io8,89I 2.52. 1 5 I36.8

Quebec .. . I,359,02.7 31.42. 144 83.I North-West Territories 56, 446 I.30 2. 35 .4

4, 3X4, 8IO IOO 00 4I4

In the second table showing the distribution by provinces the number 4I4 will be used as a basis for the calculations in- stead of the full number 443, because 2.9

of the men were found to have been born outside of Canlada, or could not be located from the addresses given in Who's Who.

The census of i88i will be used to give the population of Canada by provinces. This census is used because it mnay be expected that the average age of the dis-

tinguished persons is today between forty and forty-five, and because the i88I census is the only one which gives all the material necessary for this study. Allowing then that the majority of the distinguished persons of today were born about the year i88i, we have 95.7 distinguished persons in a mnillion. This number is intermediate between the stand- ards set by Sir Francis Galton-one illustrious man in a million, and z50 eminent men in a million.

The percentage of the population in each province is comnpared with the percentage of distinguished people born in each province of Canada. Prince Edward Island has a greater fecundity of distinguished men than the other provinces. In Prince Edward Island "the population is of mixed origin, a large proportion being immigrants from Great Britain, and the rest natives of the country, descendants of the French Acadians, Scottish, English and Irish settlers, and the Loyalists who went to the island after the Amnerican Revolution."' The total population of Canada by the i88i census was 4,324,8I0.

By the previous calculations there are 414 Canadian-born distinguished men living in Canada today, therefore the per-

centage of distinguished men is 44 X 100

4,32Z4,8I0 or 0.00957 or 95.7 men in a million. These 4I4 distinguished men were born in the different provinces as shown in Table II.

The number and percentage of distinguished persons born in cities, towns, and rural communities is interesting, showing I70 or 4I.o6 per cent born in cities, 59 or iz.z5 per cent in towns, and i85 or 44.68 per cent in rural communities. The rural population in Canada in I89I

was 3,Z96,14I or 68 .z9 per cent. The Encyclopaedia Britannica. Ninth edition, Edin-

burgh, i88?, Vol. I9, p. 740.




urban population was 1.537,098 or 3I.80 per cent of the total. Therefore the urban population was to the rural as i is to 2.I4.

We have 229 urban births to i8s rural births if the total numnber of distinguished persons born in cities and towns are classed together. T'herefore the urban births are to the rural as I is to 0.807.

Although the rural population in I89I

was more than double the urban population it produced only 0.807 of a distinguished person to i produced by the urban population. Therefore, the contribution of the urban population almost tripled the contribution of the rural population.

XVith respect to the educational side of their environment, 2.94 out of the 414

superior inen and women, or 7I.OI per cent' received a university education or the equivalent.

There is a well known theory that the Nordic stock is superior to all others. Allowing that British (English, Scottish, Irish, and Welsh) is Nordic, the results obtained from the first three questions tend to substantiate this theory. There is a distinct preponderance of British stock among the distinguished persons of Canada. This preponderance no doubt is due in part to the fact that Canada is a British colony and peopled mostly by immigrants from the British islands. People of British origin make up 58.93 per cent of the population. The British stock contributed 72.37 per cent of the distinguished men of Canada. The nationality origin of 30.03 per cent of the population was French, who contributed 4.97 per cent of the distinguished persons,2

while II.04 per cent is given as "rest" who conltributed zz.65 per cent. If this last figure appears deceptive, it is because 'rest" includes many of mixed British descent, and few pure nationality. The second subdivision under the general heading, the contribution of the different racial types to the superior stock of Can- ada, will now be considered. This subdivision deals with the hair and eye colour of the distinguished persons of Canada.

TABLE III

NATIONALITY ORIGINS OF POPULATION OF CANADA

BY CENSUS OF I88I

NUMBER PER CENT

(English .88I, 30I 20.038

British Irish ............... 957,403 2.2I4 Scottish ............ 699,863 i6. i8

Other .............. 9,947 0.2.3

2,548,514 58.93 French ..................... I, 548,5I4 30.03 Rest ...................... 477,367 II.04

4,32.7, 810 I OO0.00

TABLE IV

NATIONALITY ORIGINS OF THE i8i DISTINGUISHED

MEN

NUMBER PER CENT

Total British.131 72.38 French ........................ 9 4.97 Rest ........................ 41 2.2.65

Total ....................... I8I 100.00

Questions i and z were designed to find out the hair and eye colour of each distinguished person. These questions were asked in order to ascertain whether or not there was any correlation between nationality origin, racial origin as shown in individual hair and eye colour, and distinction.1

2 There is some doubt in my mind as to the real significance of these figures. Who's Who is published in Toronto and there may be a racial bias in the choice of persons included in it. Furthermore the general culture of the French population with its religious restraints makes it difficult for them to obtain specialized training.

3The hair and eye colour divisions used were taken from Hrdlicka with a few additions and changes. Hrdlicka. The Old White Americans. Washington, 1917, p. 599.



308 SOCIAL FORCES

The figures show a decided predomi- nance of the light-eyed types, IZ4 of the i8i considered falling in this category. Of the I)4 with light eyes, 65 have medium brown hair; this is the largest single group. The next largest group falls outside the light-eyed section; it

TABLE V NATIONALITY ORIGINS OF THEI i8i DISTINGUISHED MEN

AND WOMEN

Scottish . .................................. 39 English ................................... 26 Itish ........................................ I- French ................................... 9 Canadian (4 generations) . .a............ 2

Dutch ..a..................... 2

Austrian ................................... I Nordic ................................... I Swiss .. . . ................ I German ................................... I Welsh ................................... I Scottish English . ..................a2.s Scottish Irish ................................ It Scottish French ............... . 3 Scottish Dutch . .a................. 2

Scottish Nordic .............................. I Scottish German .............................. I English Irish ................................ 9 English French ............... . 5 English Dutch ............................... I English German ............... . 2.

English Welsh . .................. z French Canadian ............................. 5 Scottish, English, Irish . . 8 Scottish, English, French ..................... z Scottish, English, Dutch ...................... I Scottish, English, Welsh ...................... I Scottish, Norman, Dane ....................... I English, Irish, French . ....................... .

English, Irish, Dutch ......................... I English, Irish, German ....................... I Irish, French, Welsh ...................... I Scottish, English, Irish and Welsh . . a........ 2

Scottish, English, French, Welsh and Dutch .... I Irish Norwegian (Icelander) ................... I

Total ................................... i8i

consists of 24 persons who have medium brown eyes and medium brown hair. The next two groups in order are mm with

light eyes and very dark brown or black hair; and zo with light eyes and light brown hair. Thirty out of 39 of those of Scottish descent have light eyes, I5 of these 30 have mediumn brown hair. Eighteen out of the z6 of English descent have light eyes; io of these i8 have medium brown hair. The pure brunettes are conspicuous by their absence.

It is thus obvious that blue, gray, or green eyes are much more numerous than the darker shades in this group of distinguished men. One should also note, however, that lighter shades of hair are less frequent than darker and that- medium shades of brown are particularly preva- lent. Moreover, that combination of blue eyes and blond hair which is the special mark of the pure Nordic strain is extremely rare. This might have been expected because of the very large Medi- terranean ingredient in the population of the British Isles and the mixture there for many centuries of various anthropological types. It should be stated also that there are two reasons why no very great significance can be attached to these figures: First, the rather indefinite manner in which they were collected. Secondly, lack of any survey which would enable one to compare this distribution of com- plexion traits with their distribution in the general population of Canada.

We pass, then, in Table VII to the important question of the extent to which distinction recurs among members of the samne families and blood relations.

The inquiry showed that 33.I4 per cent of the distinguished persons had a distinguished father, mother, or a distinguished grandparenit, no farther removed than a great-grandfather; and that 66.83 per cent were without any distinguished father, mother or grandparent.

It is worth noting further that the percentage with a distinguished brother,




TABLE VI

COLOR OF HAIR

Blond .................................. IS

Light brown ................................. 2-3 Medium brown and brown .................... IOO Very dark brown and black ................... 40 Red, reddish brown and auburnl ................ 6

:I8I

COLOR OF EYEs

Blue ......... 6z2

Gray ......... 52. I24 blond Green ......... ioJ

Light brown.36 medium Medium brown ...... ... 31I

Dark brown ......... brunette Black .........2.)

i8i i8i

TABLE VII

DISTINGUISHED PARENTS

Number with distinguished father ............. -2.- Number with distinguished nmother ............ I Number with distinguished grandfather ........ 14 Number with distinguished father and mother. . 4 Number with distinguished father and grand-

father .................................... iI

Number with distinguished great-grandfather.. . 3 Number with distinguished father and great-

graand-father ............................... . Number with distinguished grandfather and

great-grandfather ........................... 3

6o Neither distinguished father, mnother, nor grand-

parent ... I1

Total ...I8i

sister, or relation is greater than the percentage with distinguished father, mother or grandparent.

DISTINGUISHED RELATIVES

Number with distinguished brothers 35; sisters 5; brother and sister 6; uncle IL;

brother and uncle i; cousin 9; brother and cousin m; brother, uncle and cousin i; sister, uncle and cousin i; great-uncle and brother i; great-uncle and uncle i; great-uncle, cousin and uncle m.; great-uncle and cousin 5; nephew i; brother, cousin and nephew i; no distinguished brothers, sisters or relations, 98. That is, there were 45.85 per cent with distinguished brother, sister, or some distinguished relation no farther removed than a great- uncle, cousin or nephew; and 54.I4 per cent without any such distinguished relative. The percentage of distinguished persons with distinguished children is small as mnight be expected considering that mnany of the distinguished persons were unmarried, had no children, or their children were too young to be judged. Of the i8i only twenty-nine, or I6.03 per cent, could be classified as having distinguished offspring. Twenty-eight had both distinguished parents or grand- parents and also other relatives, while nine had also distinguished children as well.

The total number of distinguished relatives is i66. Of the I8 Ipersons whose answers were used 84 had a distinguished relative or relatives, consequently the number of distinguished relatives for

I66 each distinguished person is - or I.97.

84 Each distinguished person averaged allnost two distinguished relatives.

The question, what are the chances of a distinguished person having a dis- tinlguished relation, as opposed to the chances of an undistinguished person having a distinguished relation, arises. On the basis of these i8i distinguished persons, of whom 84 have one or mnore distinguished relations, the chances of a distinguished person having a distin-

84 guished relation are; o,8 r 46.40 in a ioo.



310 SOCIAL FORCES

In Canada there are 96Z,I6i persons aged 40 to 49,4 from whom were selected the 97 distinguished persons who have no distinguished relationis; therefore the chances of an undistinguished person

having a distinguished relation are 697 6

or o.oioo8 in a ioo. The discrepancy between these figures,

46.40 and o.oioo8, is obvious, and in- volves the conclusion that a distinguished person has 4640 chances to the i chance of an undistinguished person, of having a distinguished relation. Therefore, it may be said that a person with distinguished relatives has 4640 more chances, than a person with distinguished relation has, of being distinguished. From this conclusion it is inferred that distinction is largely hereditary, or at least, runs in families.

The third and the last group of questions were designed to ascertain the rate at which distinguished family strains were multiplying. Results indicate that the total number of children of distinguished people has fallen from I073 to 474 in one generation. In each of z6 falnilies of the fathers of distinguished men there were teni or more children; in each of go there were five to nine children; in each of 59, two to four children; and six families had onie child each; making a total of I073 children in i8i families. In i8I families of distingTaished men, only two families had ten or more children each; 3i had five to nine children; 73 had two to four; i8 had one child each; while 57 families had no children; making a total of 474 children. There is thus shown a great difference between the previous generation anid this one in size of family, though it must not be over- looked that famnilies of this generation are more or less incomplete.

4 CGaniada Year Book, Ottawa, 19212--23, p. I56. The persons aged 40 to 49 were selected because it was calculated that the ages of the distinguished persons are today between 40 and 5o.

A SHORT COURSE IN CITIZENSHIP PROBLEMS REGINALD STEVENS KIMBALL

ITH the introduction of straight courses in civics into junior and senior high schools, many

teachers have been at a loss as to the material which they should choose from the vast amount which might be included in the course if time per- mitted. If the points covered are to receive adequate treatment, several days must be allowed for discussion on each topic; the time devoted to a given phase is just so much time taken away from other possible subjects. The teacher is torn between a desire to cover the whole field in fragmentary fashion and to de- velop a few aspects in their entirety.

The teacher-training institutions meet this same problem. If they are to prepare their students for the task of teaching citizenship either directly or indirectly they must give attention to the problems of citizenship. The curriculum of the normal school and teachers' college is already overcrowded, and there is diffi- culty in finding a place for any new subject, no mnatter how important it may be recognized to be.

In his own institution, the author has been called upon to offer a course in citizenship ranging from twenty-five to thirty lessons for students in the two-year courses, covering the bare essentials, and



hereditary greatness in canada

Documents